Savannah Bank & Trust Co. of Savannah v. Shuman, 18725

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
• Writing for the Court: BUSSEY; MOSS
• Citation: 250 S.C. 344,157 S.E.2d 864
• Parties: SAVANNAH BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF SAVANNAH, Respondent, v. Marie S. SHUMAN, Appellant.
• Docket Number: No. 18725,18725
• Decision Date: 13 November 1967

Page 864

157 S.E.2d 864 250 S.C. 344 SAVANNAH BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF SAVANNAH, Respondent,
v.
Marie S. SHUMAN, Appellant. No. 18725. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Nov. 13, 1967.

[250 S.C. 345]

Page 865

James P. Harrelson, Walterboro, for appellant.

Buist, Buist, Smythe & Smythe, Charleston, Holland Smith, Hampton, for respondent.

BUSSEY, Justice:

This is an action for the foreclosure of a mortgage on certain real property in Hampton County, South Carolina, owned by the defendant-appellant, the appeal[250 S.C. 346] being from a decree of foreclosure. This court would be fully warranted in dismissing the appeal for failure to comply with the rules of this court. In violation of Rule 8, Section 2, appellant's brief is not preceded by a statement of the questions involved. The appellant's exceptions, other than that numbered one, are in clear violation of Rule 4, Section 6, in more than one particular. The respondent, however, makes no point of appellant's failure to comply with the rules of this court, and we have in the past, as a matter of grace, waived the requirement of Rule 8, Section 2. See Cooley v. Cooley, 222 S.C. 513, 73 S.E.2d 712. Additionally, the breach of Rule 4, Section 6, has occasionally been waived where a faulty exception has attempted to present a meritorious assignment of error. See Aaron v. Hampton Motors, Inc., 240 S.C. 26, 124 S.E.2d 585. Appellant's exceptions 2, 3 and 4 at least attempt to present a single meritorious assignment of error, which we shall, as a matter of grace, consider in addition to the question presented by exception one.

For the consideration and disposition of the two questions involved only a relatively brief statement of the facts is necessary. The respondent is a Georgia corporation located and doing business in the City of Savannah. Appellant is a married woman, she and her husband being residents of Hampton County, South Carolina. Appellant's husband negotiated a loan from the bank in the amount of $24,000.00, for the purpose of purchasing certain equipment for use in his business. The loan was made jointly to the husband and wife, being evidenced

Page 866

by a joint note, signed by both of them, the mortgage securing the same being signed only by the wife as the real estate was in her name. Both note and mortgage were executed in Hampton County, South Carolina, and delivered to the respondent in its banking office in Savannah, Georgia, for acceptance, the bank being fully aware of the purpose of the loan, and upon the authority of the appellant wife, disbursing all proceeds to the husband. The note called for interest at the rate of 8% Per annum, which is a legal rate of interest in Georgia, but which rate [250...